In a judgment dated 20.04.2026, the Fast Track Special Court (POCSO)<\/strong> at Panaji, presided over by Dr. Pooja C. Kavlekar<\/strong>, acquitted a 19-year-old boy in a rape case, accused of serious charges under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita<\/a> and Section 4 of the POCSO Act<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The case began when the complainant alleged that his minor daughter was kidnapped from a hockey ground on 19.06.2025 and later subjected to sexual assault<\/strong>. Based on this, an FIR was registered, and the accused was arrested and put on trial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The prosecution claimed that the accused had taken the girl across multiple locations<\/strong> and engaged in sexual relations with her.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, during the trial, the entire case took a different turn when the victim herself testified before the Court. She clearly stated that she had voluntarily gone with the accused<\/strong> and had travelled with<\/strong> him to different places, including Ahmedabad and even Nepal. She also revealed that they got married in a temple<\/strong> in Ahmedabad.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Most importantly, the victim admitted that her earlier statement about sexual relations was not true<\/strong>. She told the Court that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cShe had falsely stated before the Magistrate that she had sexual relations with the accused when in fact she had no such sexual relations.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n She further explained that she made this statement because:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u00a0\u201cIn her village if something like this was told then the parents get the couple married.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The victim also refused to undergo medical examination<\/strong>, which further weakened the prosecution\u2019s case. The Court noted that there was no medical or independent evidence to support the allegation of sexual assault.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The father of the victim had initially stated that his daughter had gone missing after attending college and hockey practice, and later it was found that she had left with the accused<\/strong>. However, this alone was not sufficient to prove kidnapping or coercion<\/strong>, especially when the victim herself denied any force or wrongdoing.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n After examining all the evidence, the Court clearly held that there was no proof<\/strong> to establish that the accused had committed rape, kidnapping, or any form of sexual assault. The Court observed that there was:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cNo material to convict the accused for the offence of kidnapping, sexual assault or rape\u201d,<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n \u00a0And therefore extended the benefit of doubt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Accordingly, the Court acquitted the accused of all charges<\/strong> under Section 64 BNS<\/strong> and Section 4 POCSO Act<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Explanatory Table: Laws And Sections Involved<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Law \/ Section<\/strong><\/td> Purpose<\/strong><\/td> How Applied in This Case<\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/thead> Section 64 BNS<\/strong><\/td> Punishes rape<\/a> offence<\/td> Main charge against accused; not proved<\/td><\/tr> Section 4 POCSO Act<\/a><\/strong><\/td> Punishes penetrative sexual assault on minor<\/td> Main POCSO charge; accused acquitted<\/td><\/tr> Section 137(2) BNS<\/strong><\/td> Deals with kidnapping \/ taking away minor<\/td> Initially invoked; later discharged<\/td><\/tr> Section 8 Goa Children\u2019s Act<\/strong><\/td> Child protection provision under Goa law<\/td> Mentioned at FIR stage<\/td><\/tr> Section 313 Cr.P.C.<\/strong><\/td> Allows court to record accused statement<\/td> Accused denied allegations<\/td><\/tr> Section 428 Cr.P.C.<\/strong><\/td> Gives set-off for custody period<\/td> Mentioned regarding detention undergone<\/td><\/tr> Section 437-A Cr.P.C.<\/strong><\/td> Requires post-judgment bail bond for appeal<\/td> Court directed bond after acquittal<\/td><\/tr> Section 330 BNSS<\/strong><\/td> Enables investigation requests \/ collection of records<\/td> Used for letters, reports and official requests<\/td><\/tr> Section 183 Statement<\/strong><\/td> Judicial statement of victim before Magistrate<\/td> Earlier statement discussed during trial<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n Case Details<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Key Takeaways<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n